How much RAM does your gaming PC need? MAYBE JUST 4GB

I've got a DigitalTrends article based on TechSpots' test

A quick quote:

"TechSpot found that even 4GB of RAM is perfectly adequate for modern titles like Grand Theft Auto V. I must admit that even I thought there might be a slight performance drop, the results showed an average framerate variation of just one frame per second "

What do you say? because I hear a lot of people saying 8Gb of RAM will be not good enough in a year or a two.

For ONLY gaming 8GB is plenty, but a lot of us do other things outside of gaming.

Also they tested using a "fresh" PC with nothing else installed and no background tasks, most of us have at least 1 or 2 (AV, Temp monitor, GPU overclocking program etc), those things all use RAM, so it wont cost you much more to go 8GB over 4GB.

some gaming devs listed 8GB as minimum for their games so i upgraded from 4 to 8 to 16 what a waste. should have just got 4 with higher speeds and even lower cas latency. maybe software are using resources more efficiently.

If I run 4k via DSR on my 980Ti, I notice that my RAM usage in Windows 7 goes from about 20% (no game running, just Windows and everyday apps I use) up to 50-55% out of 8GB.

I'd always suggest that 8GB is ideal. I don't think we'll see a quick jump any time soon for games to exceed 4GB of RAM, but it will eventually happen. Why not get 8GB for a few dollars more over 4GB? Then you don't have to worry about it.

I noticed some games can use more than 4GB or near it so 8GB is the recommended.

4GB is too little for some games.

And yet I used over 4GB playing the Witcher 2 just now.

4GB just doesn't cut it in modern games, I have noticed quite a few games using around 5-6GB (windows included + other staff).

So you need a minimum of 6 GB to be ok these days.

8GB is the right choice in order to be comfortable.

Been playing a decent amount of Ark and that game uses up to 10.5 GB cached.

As you can see... In use it's nearing 7 GB with just the game, IE11 and skype... With nothing but basic windows processes.

Just that GTA5 test proves that pure fps isn't everything.

I played the game with 4Gb last month before my new sticks arrived. The fps was the same, but it was such a choppy mess.

4GB for some reasons won't run well for some games. Experienced the extremely laggy 4GB RAM in Dying light

I read the original techspot test 2 days ago, How Much RAM? 4GB vs. 8GB vs. 16GB Performance.

There were cases that the difference was huge in non-gaming scenarios, but in gaming having more than 8GB wasn't beneficial...

Gallery

So like Techspot said in the conclusion:

Overall, we see 8GB as the standard right now which is why we recommend it throughout our PC buying guide, from the Budget Box to the Enthusiast's PC, while 16GB of RAM is only essential for specific high-demand scenarios.

:)

@Truth_Hurts_U: how is that game running these days?

A relatively poorly conducted test IMO. What's the deal with the 65 empty chrome tabs in the background? That doesn't help test results in any meaningful way, and if anything, just creates a bit of a loaded test environment. Oddly enough, 2.2GB of RAM used by Chrome is more like 8 open tabs for me...no where near 65. Curious if he just had them on empty pages? With 16 tabs right now I'm exceeding 6GB used in Windows 8.1. If he was trying to simulate someone playing games while having things running in the background, I think he did a fairly poor job, I'd assume anyone who likes to game with things running in the background would have at least 4GB used in the background.

I'm still going to recommend 16GB for enthusiasts. Obviously not a vital upgrade, but definitely if you have the money, I wouldn't recommend against it if you like to multi-task with no worries. RAM is really cheap, and there's more to performance than FPS measurements from short benchmarks. The performance increase would be more noticeable during things like alt-tabbing and multi-tasking when gaming is involved (which is something you might do often if you like to listen to music while you play certain games). Or if you're like me and always have a lot of Chrome tabs running with video content, you probably won't regret having the extra RAM. And of course, I wouldn't make any bets than Arkham Knight is going to be the most RAM consuming game out of all the games coming out over the course of the next year.

@horgen: It's pretty fun, been playing on a private server.

I get 35 average FPS with max settings with my 980 Ti at 1080 res. So optimization is still something they need to work on.

Damn... I play at 1440, 3440*1440 if it supports 21:9 ratio... Got a 980Ti myself but it won't be enough.

With all this shit I have running in the background, along with the resolution of my games being 1440p 4gb would never work. I need at least 8, but opted for 16 because why the **** not.

Chrome sometimes uses more then 4gb combined with other windows tasks. Its enough just not for me.

Not that I care about Advanced Warfare, but I remember multiple people remarking near launch that Advanced Warfare being a stutter-fest if you didn't have at least 8GB of RAM, and that you probably needed 16 to get an ideal experience. Yet the game didn't ever actually use more than 6, from what I understand. Some games are funky about how they handle RAM.

There are always going to be games that oddly benefit from RAM more than others. I would've loved to see one involving more games, and different RAM speeds. and different amount of background RAM usage. Instead of giving a useful range of info on how RAM affects game performance, it's more like the editor had a specific point in mind that he wanted to prove, and then tested just enough data to depict a pattern and then moved on.

I've got 16GB. I do have an extra 8GB sitting right in front of me. But anyways, even with 16GB, I still see some games cross the 8GB barrier for ram usage. I had Assassins Creed Unity pass 10GB before.

I do play at 1440. So I guess games at 1080 might use less. I still find 8GB to be the sweet spot and ram is pretty cheap these days. You can get the same kit I got for around $88. Which is 16GB.

Keep in mind when I bought this kit back in March I got it for $108, and it was even more then. If it weren't for sales and price matching, it would have costed me more than $150.